Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No apologies have been received and I propose we open the meeting. The purpose of the meeting today is for the joint committee to discuss the long-term strategy and plans for the future development of Irish ports. We are joined by representatives of the Port of Cork, Dublin Port, Shannon Foynes Port Company and Rosslare Europort. I am very pleased to welcome on behalf of the committee: Mr. Eoin McGettigan, CEO, Port of Cork; Mr Barry O'Connell, CEO, Mr. Michael Sheary, chief financial officer, CFO, and company secretary and Mr Cormac Kennedy, head of property, Dublin Port; Mr Pat Keating, CEO, Shannon Foynes Port Company; and Mr Glenn Carr, director, port authority, Rosslare Europort and Mr. Barry Kenny, media relations, Iarnród Éireann.

I will read out a quick note on privilege to both witnesses and members. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if witnesses' statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where he or she does not adhere to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask all members participating via Microsoft Teams that, prior to making their contributions to the meeting, they confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus. If attending in the committee room, members are asked to exercise personal responsibility to protect themselves and others from the risk of contracting Covid-19.

I invite Mr McGettigan to make his opening statement on behalf of the Port of Cork. We have quite a number of opening statements, which are all very comprehensive, but I ask that the witnesses might try to slightly summarise or to stick within the five minutes each allocation in their contributions. We can publish the full speeches on the record.

Mr. Eoin McGettigan:

I will summarise my statement and be even better. I thank the committee very much for the invite. For those who do not know, the Port of Cork operates the second largest in the State and we operate all six types of port traffic. Our long-term plan is fairly simple. By 2050, we intend to be out of the city centre of Cork and operating in the lower harbour. We also plan to have net-zero emissions by 2050. Those are the two planks of our plan.

Our board approved this plan in March, having had a number of consultation phases over the past three years with stakeholders comprising State agencies, planning officials and the public. This plan will be launched later this month.

There are a number of milestones to this. How does one take a port, which is currently in the city centre and has been there for 200 years, and move it down to the lower harbour?

Step 1 of that was done last year with the opening of a new terminal in Ringaskiddy at a cost of almost €100 million. Step 2 will involve building new facilities in Ringaskiddy where we have planning permission and foreshore licences to build two new berths. Our intention is to use those berths to support the offshore renewable industry in the immediate future and then to repurpose them for container traffic once the offshore renewable industry has built out its needs out at sea.

That is one of the planks of our plan to get out of the city. The other is to build new facilities at Marino Point on the former Irish Fertiliser Industries, IFI, facility but we will need improved road infrastructure to that location to do that. When we leave the city, we will leave behind us two sites, one on the city quays right in the centre of Cork and the other in Tivoli. Both of those are very suitable for compact living and urban regeneration and that is our plan. We have worked with the planning agencies on this and the repurposing of those sites in that way is included in the national development plan, NDP, and the city development plan. We will need to get a market price for those sites when we leave to finance the other work that I have mentioned. In a nutshell, our plan is to leave the city and be relocated in the lower harbour by 2050, and to achieve net-zero emissions in that time scale.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. McGettigan and nvite Mr. O'Connell to make an opening statement on behalf of Dublin Port.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Good afternoon Chairman, Deputies and Senators. I have prepared an abbreviated version of my original statement, which I will go through now.

As an island nation, Ireland’s ports are essential to our economic growth and stability, with more than 90% of our international trade by volume coming through our ports each year. Dublin Port is the largest of our ports and accounts for 80% of total containerised volumes on the island. In 2022, 60% of Dublin Port's volumes were imports and 40% were exports. A recent Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, OECD, study showed that 43% of the value of Irish exports are based on international imports, which is five times higher than the OECD average, making exports the primary activity of the port. This demonstrates just how important it is to get our strategy right.

Strategy is about making choices and Dublin Port's choices are determined by the Harbours Act, which stipulates that its mandate is to provide capacity to enable international trade. How the port chooses to do this is also informed and supported by numerous policies, including the NDP, the national planning framework, NPF, the National Ports Policy, the greater Dublin area transport strategy, the Dublin city development plan and the national climate action plan. If enabling international trade is the port's primary purpose, then the port's lands are its primary tools. On one of the smallest and most constrained sites in Europe, Dublin Port is already achieving efficiencies well above its European peers and with no ability to expand its lands further, it will require even higher efficiencies built into its numbers going forward.

Dublin Port is a central hub in what is a highly effective and efficient route to market system. It is inextricably linked to the port tunnel and the M50 - to the extent that 73% of everything that comes into and goes out of the port emanates from within a 90 km radius - which, in turn, supports a highly-developed network of distribution hubs and logistics centres. This route to market delivers a huge variety of products in the shortest distance possible and in the most cost-effective way to the largest concentration of the population.

On the basis of an up-to-date, thorough and objective review of demand and capacity forecasts by Indecon economic forecasting consultants, Dublin Port is confident of being able to deliver port capacity until approximately 2040, provided it can deliver the three projects already flagged in the Dublin Port Masterplan 2040 document, first published in 2012. The basis of this assumption is that the lands on which the masterplan was based originally are available. Any reduction in lands available will, at best, reduce capacity and bring forward the date by which the port runs out of capacity. At worst, it could undermine the financial viability of the third and final project, thus significantly reducing potential capacity and the associated benefits, including community-gain initiatives. It is important to note that like other ports, Dublin Port is a self-financing commercial semi-State company and does not rely on Exchequer funding. In that context, the numbers have to work relative to our investment in infrastructure.

After 2040, additional core port capacity will be needed at a national level including, most likely, another facility on the east coast. Dublin Port has been flagging this scenario for some time now and published its opinion on same in a comprehensive set of papers in November 2020. It is our view that the determination of a final location, its planning and construction is likely to take up to 15 years before it has a material impact on our national capacity. The costs associated with such a project are also likely to be high and an innovative approach to financing may be required. Our assumption is that this will be addressed as part of the National Ports Policy review which is currently underway.

As we look to 2040 it is important to realise that today Dublin Port is already experiencing pinch points in its capacity. Lands occupied by State services for good reason in 2019 are currently underutilised and are tying up ro-ro lands equivalent to 19% of 2022 volumes. Equally, we are under pressure for lo-lo capacity. We have had to turn business away due to these constraints so it is important that we take decisions quickly to alleviate this pressure.

The primary role of Dublin Port is to provide the capacity required to enable the continued growth in international trade and by association, the continued growth in our economy. Our strategic planning through our 2040 masterplan translates this ambition into a series of three projects, one of which is complete. The second is under way while the third and final project is detailed and ready to go, subject to planning permission. The provision of sufficient port capacity in Dublin Port is crucial to the continued economic and industrial development of the island of Ireland. As longer-term alternatives are considered, action needs to be taken to deliver sufficient port capacity now and that is something to which Dublin Port Company is committed.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you very much, Mr. O'Connell. Now, on behalf of Rosslare Europort, I invite Mr. Carr to make his opening statement.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

I thank the committee for the opportunity to discuss Rosslare Europort. Members will be aware that Rosslare Europort has seen substantial growth in the past two years, particularly with the advent of Brexit. We now handle between 18% and 20% of the ro-ro freight traffic in the country and we forecast that more than 600,000 passengers will go through the port in 2023. We have seen a sixfold increase in shipping services at the port and a 398% increase in EU freight now entering and leaving the country through the port. These increases in services have played a particularly important role for our exporters and importers and have ensured that our supply chains have been maintained over the past two years.

We are now entering a very important era when we will see the highest ever investment in Rosslare Europort in its history. That investment will comprise a number of infrastructure projects that will enable the port to help to address a number of the issues that have been mentioned, particularly capacity in the south east. It will provide a new port access road and the connection of motorways into the port. The investment will also enable Rosslare Europort to play a vital role in the new offshore renewable energy hub. Rosslare Europort is now primed to take full advantage of these opportunities. The five infrastructure projects commencing this July include the construction of the terminal 7 border control facility in conjunction with the work that has been undertaken with the Office of Public Works, OPW, various Departments, CIÉ and our stakeholders at the port. This will also include the completion of our port freight and passenger masterplan. We are also heavily advancing the digitisation of the port to utilise the opportunities provided by technology to increase efficiencies and throughput at the port which can sometimes not be matched by the physical space required. We have had great support from Wexford County Council and Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, with the new port access road which will alleviate the congestion currently being experienced, particularly in Kilrane and communities close to the port. We will provide new access for passengers that will enable them to spend locally and to access the port separately from the freight traffic.

The development of offshore renewable energy, ORE, is obviously critical for the country. Having conducted an extensive review with the industry, the local community and the planning authorities, we believe that the ideal location for the development of the initial offshore renewable energy hub facility is Rosslare Europort. We are the closest port, in nautical miles, to the majority of windfarms that will be built in the Irish and Celtic Seas. Significant work is under way and nearing completion on the business case as well as the design, planning and funding of the offshore renewable energy hub. This proposal offers the offshore industry and the State the best port infrastructure investment option to ensure that Ireland maximises the opportunities available. It is our stated ambition to deliver Ireland's national ORE hub by 2027, providing a world-class facility that will drive the delivery of these projects. This will ensure that the economic opportunity of substantial jobs and enterprise is created for the south east and the wider economy. Our planned new facility at the port will also be designed to be multimodal in the future. This means that once the heavy ORE activity is completed for the various projects, the facility at the port will be easily transferable for additional ro-ro, con-ro and lo-lo activity. This will be of strategic importance for the east coast, especially given the future capacity problems at Dublin Port over the next decade, as outlined by Mr. O'Connell.

We are currently in the planning phase of this major project. I wish to express our gratitude for the support we have received to-date from the various Departments and Government agencies along with the ORE industry and the potential developers involved. However, we must ensure that the Rosslare hub project is delivered on time as we simply cannot allow the port that is best located to support these projects not to deliver the infrastructure required to meet the industry needs. Iarnród Éireann is committed and will continue to work at pace to deliver this project, but ongoing support will be required to ensure that the planning, construction, delivery and appropriate funding mechanisms and workable solutions are found as the opportunities associated with this project are too great to be missed.

It is critical that connectivity from Rosslare Europort to all major cities and industrial hubs throughout Ireland be further supported and developed. I already mentioned the new port access road which is being funded by TFI and Wexford County Council. The Oilgate to Rosslare motorway is under review and we look forward to collaborating with all stakeholders on it.

We cannot forget the challenges that traffic congestion and over-reliance on Dublin creates especially now that is has been proven how a regional port like Rosslare can attract and handle new freight and passengers as demonstrated over the past two years.

We cannot not shy away from the importance of ensuring how a more sustainable way to move freight and passengers at our ports and around the country can be delivered. As part of our medium to longer terms plans for Rosslare, we see an opportunity to further connect it by means of rail, particularly rail freight. We await the outcome of the strategic all-island rail review regarding how this might be best achieved.

As part my wider brief within Iarnród Éireann I have responsibility for national rail freight. Creating and enhancing rail connectivity to our key seaports will be essential to ensure we grow rail freight across the country and meet the real opportunities that industry and society now demands.

We have very ambitious plans for rail freight, and we must enhance and grow rail freight at Dublin and Waterford ports which are already connected. Work has commenced on the reinstatement of the Shannon to Foynes line and discussions are under way with the Port of Cork regarding possible future rail freight connections. Rail freight is a key national and EU policy in decarbonising the transport sector. Ports have a responsibility to ensure that rail-based solutions form part of their master plans. Connecting ports and rail will deliver sustainable alternatives and create regional balanced economic activity.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Finally, I call Mr. Keating from Shannon Foynes Port Company. I think we heard from its chairman recently.

Mr. Pat Keating:

I thank the committee for inviting me today. Shannon Foynes Port Company is Ireland’s largest bulk port company and has statutory jurisdiction on the Shannon Estuary covering 500 sq. km. With channel depths of up to 32 m, we handle the largest vessels entering Irish waters and have capacity to handle over 11 million tons per annum. Our activities have a trade value of circa €8.5 billion per annum supporting 3,900 jobs.

Both EU and national policies, including the national development plan, endorse the strategic importance of Shannon Foynes Port which is a tier 1 port of national strategic importance and a core corridor port in the EU’s TEN-T regulations. To date, we have made several successful funding applications under the TEN-T budget, receiving grant aid supporting projects costing over €40 million.

Importantly, there are several sites adjoining the estuary, extending to 1,200 ha, which are zoned for maritime development, making Shannon Foynes ideally suited for future national port infrastructure of scale for this country. To fully realise these comparative advantages, expansion and development of the port is led by its 30-year master plan, Vision 2041, which was updated in 2022 with the assistance of global engineering company Bechtel. The updated Vision 2041 strategic review was launched by the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, last November.

Our plans take account of changes in policy, such as 2030 and 2050 climate action targets together with changed freight market dynamics since 2013. Accordingly, future port expansion at Shannon Foynes is generally classified over four main themes: the deployment of floating offshore wind at scale; the green hydrogen and transition facilitating alternative fuels production; required port expansion to meet expanded, diversified and more sustainable logistics services; and the implementation of the Limerick docklands framework strategy.

With regard to the deployment of floating offshore wind at scale, our plans demonstrate that €100 billion of offshore wind farm investment can locate in the Atlantic within 36 hours of the estuary, and that in order to support that offshore investment, €12 billion in supply-chain investment could locate to the Shannon Estuary by 2050. Our plans also provide for the development of a 1 GW green hydrogen production facility powered by offshore wind. This facility also allows for production of derivative fuels such as green ammonia and-or e-methanol.

In addition to becoming an integration port for floating offshore wind, the Vision 2041 review found that Foynes Port, conditional on developing the proposed new deepwater quay at Foynes Island, could add substantial freight capacity to the national supply chain. Importantly, this capacity at Foynes will be situated at an uncongested point in the national road and rail network, assuming completion of the Vision 2041 transport objectives.

The €100 million Limerick to Foynes rail connection and the €450 million Limerick to Foynes road scheme are key requirements of Vision 2041. These crucial hinterland connections together with the port infrastructure planned for Foynes, will transform the Foynes terminal into a major national freight and logistics hub. This connectivity together with its 180 ha port estate, ensures Shannon Foynes can provide substantial capacity and resilience for the national freight sector.

Successful implementation of our plans, by delivering on the identified offshore renewable energy and logistics opportunities, will be transformational for the Shannon Estuary and the country. The Atlantic Ocean’s renewables resources could provide an almost infinite green energy supply, ensuring that our country becomes energy independent for the first time in its history. Freight transport can be considerably decarbonised by reducing tonne per kilometre travelled by using the planned Foynes logistics hub and by the production of e-fuels. Resulting economic impacts will be in the order of tens of thousands of jobs created and billions of euro invested in supply chain and route-to-market infrastructure and facilities over the entire western seaboard.

The successful implementation of our plans requires a collaborative and co-operative approach with all stakeholders. In that regard, the following areas should be addressed in the short term. On offshore renewable policy, we need to prioritise the milestones around floating offshore wind development, ensure MARA is operational in quarter 3 of 2023 and ensure that An Bord Pleanála has the human resources to meet prescribed timelines. On hinterland connectivity, the completion of the Limerick to Foynes road scheme and reopening of the Foynes to Limerick rail line are mission critical. On enabling infrastructure, new deepwater port infrastructure and updated offshore grid strategy are essential to enable the utilisation of our immense renewable resources in the Atlantic. Shannon Foynes is addressing the former and calls for the latter to be fast-tracked.

New port infrastructure estimated to cost €500 million will be required to facilitate our plans. However, this investment could mobilise over €150 billion in private sector investment in offshore renewables and supply chain activities. We note that the Department of Transport is planning a new ports policy this year and we request that new port funding mechanisms be considered for port projects of national strategic significance.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have a rota of our 14 members, with each member moving up each time. I actually get the first slot this time, but I will be back to No. 14 next week.

I thank all the witnesses for their comprehensive opening statements, which contain a general thread of commonality. We are here to talk about long-term strategy and so everyone is talking about their future plans, infrastructure, spending quite a lot of money, planning for the future and looking at the current constraints. There has been much talk about rail. I will try to focus a bit more on Dublin because I am based in Dublin. Other members of the committee come from other areas and they will probably target the areas closest to them. I will try to touch on other things as well.

Dublin Port covers a very large area. Mr. O'Connell has said it has constraints and is quite small. Many of us living in Dublin do not really know much about it because it is not that visible. When driving around the place, one does not see much of it. I congratulate all the witnesses because we generally have people coming in here when there are problems, but they are not here for that reason. We probably do not hear that much about ports because they are just working successfully. Rosslare Europort has increased greatly since Brexit. All the ports are handling much more exports and imports. In everything we do as a small open economy we depend on our ports for a huge amount of our exports. Equally, many of the items we make need imports in the first place to finally make the exports. Without the ports, none of this happens. Equally, the Minister for Finance would not have to worry about how to spend all this corporation tax if the ports were not playing their part.

What are the challenges that we as members of the Oireachtas and ultimately the public need to know? There will be barriers and constraints. I know the Minister has expressed concern about Dublin Port's longer term strategy.

How would Mr. O'Connell respond to those concerns? Equally, what are the challenges we need to be aware of? Do they relate to funding, planning permission or MARA? Dublin Port has all these plans, but in ten or 15 years' time, what are the reasons they will succeed or what are the challenges that will stop them succeeding? What do we need to know to make sure the challenges are eliminated or reduced?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach for his quite broad-ranging question. If I may, I will start with capacity. Effectively, that is the effectively the single biggest challenge we face. To respond to capacity, it is necessary to have an idea of what demand is. It is one of the questions the Minister raised with us a couple of months ago. As a result of that, we took the opportunity to go back and to reassess our demand forecasts. We wanted to have an objective assessment of what those demand forecasts were so we went to Indecon, which, as the committee will probably know, is a quite well-renowned econometric forecasting consultancy. We said to it a couple of things. First, we want to understand what drives our demand, to begin with. Two, we want to look at the latest long-term economic forecasts when we have an understanding of what drives demand. Then, last but not least, we want to overlay our capacity numbers based on how we expect that to progress over the coming years relative to our projects in order that we can see the extent to which we are meeting capacity or not. The first thing Indecon did was look at a very in-depth analysis of long-term historical data and come to the conclusion, not surprisingly, that there was a very strong correlation between growth and volumes in the port and GDP growth. The second thing it did was look at the latest available economic data. Central to that was the Department of Finance long-term finance projections, which were published in spring of 2022, and OECD long-term forecasts. It put that together and came up with a range of growth rates for GDP, in particular, plus a variety of other economic indicators. As a result, we had the correlation and had what the long-term forecasts were and then we overlaid our capacity plans. The upshot of all that is that the original assumptions we made in the master plan 2040 hold, as does our contention that we can deliver capacity as required by the economy to the point of 2040 and at that stage we will run out. Is that provable? It is not. It could be 2045 or it could be sooner. Indicatively, however, based on an objective assessment of our plans and on economic trends, that is where we would come out.

To get there, we need to deliver on our master plan, which is made up of three components, three major projects. The first is already completed. It is the deepening of berths and the strengthening of quay walls, allowing bigger ships from Europe, which was fortuitous when we see what happened with Brexit. The second is called MP2. It has literally just started. It will create additional berths for ro-ro and lo-lo on the south side of the port. The 3FM, the third and final master plan, is the one which is currently out for consultation. That is the development of the southern port. Again, everything is within the 265 ha we have available. We are not extending our footprint beyond that. It is utilising the lands we have available. The challenge at this point in time, then, is to secure planning for 3FM. That is vital because we will talk, I am sure, at some stage about the time it takes to plan major infrastructure in ports. Consider that Poolbeg is already a brownfield site. It has been designated for port purposes for a long time. Its neighbours are an incinerator, two power plants, a wastewater treatment plant, etc. Even at that, however, even given the fact that it is a brownfield site and its designation, it will still take close to 20 years from the original designs through planning through to completion. That is a very long timescale, and it is very important we begin now. As I said previously, one of the difficulties we have is focusing too much on 2040 and the big projects that have to happen without realising as well that we have pinch points within the port today. Our lo-lo capacity is under pressure and our ro-ro capacity is under pressure. Our ro-ro capacity is under pressure, as I mentioned earlier, because of lands allocated in the context of Brexit, which was done with the right intention at the time on the part of everybody concerned because nobody knew quite what was going to happen.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are they needed to the extent that it was thought they would be?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

No. Right now the utilisation is at an extremely low point, and we call on the State agencies again to do what we said we would do, that is, now that we know how things have settled, to reappraise those and ask what we actually need. We have a plan, on which Mr. Kennedy has been working with the agencies, which would see those reallocated or right-sized to be able to do what they need to do for Brexit. That land is equivalent to 19% of our ro-ro capacity. If you were in the port at the moment and you were to look out the windows of the port, you would see that we are already at the limit, so that is a relatively quick fix that we need. That is a pressing need in the short term. Longer term, it is a securing of planning for the 3FM project and to make sure that happens on time and in full. Luckily, we have a highly experienced team when it comes to port infrastructure, planning and construction and we have delivered over 200 contracts at this stage on time and within budget since the start of the overall master plan. We are therefore confident of being able to deliver this for the third plan, but we need to make sure we secure that planning and can move forward with purpose.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know that Cork and Shannon have a number of facilities. Dublin Port is basically one entity. It comprises areas north and the south of the Liffey, but it is all one entity. It does not have any other operations anywhere else.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

It is one entity at the port, but we have another entity which is close to the airport. It is what we call our inland port. That is purposed for what we call non-core activities. Because we import more than we export in volume terms, we tend to have a lot empty containers, so we tend to use the inland port for empty containers and, therefore, we do not take up vital port space for the transaction of goods.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As to the Minister's concerns about Dublin Port's plans, what would your response be as to why it is as important as it is?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

One of the Minister's concerns was about what I have just described, that is, how the demand forecast can be this and then go to that level. I think the Minister was also connecting that to the level of consumption domestically. I think we have addressed that quite comprehensively now and we have done so objectively because it was important for us to know as well that we had an objective and fresh, up-to-date view. The other particular dynamic which is really important there is the extent to which the port is responsible for exports. When you look at future expansion, it is not based just on the fact that our population will grow by 20% and we are becoming more affluent as a nation and, therefore, average consumption is going up as well. A large, if not the largest, part of that is driven by the potential for export to the international market and the opportunity there is on a cap. That was one, and there-----

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Again, those exports are generally being manufactured within the hinterland of the Dublin area. There was a point made, I think, that 60% of it is within 40 km and over 70% is within 90 km.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Correct.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would think that the idea of moving the port to Drogheda, Dundalk or somewhere else, which has been talked about occasionally, does not make sense. We have already built the port tunnel, which was specifically for the port. It would not seem to make sense to do that, but there are arguments that if a lot of what Dublin Port is doing is exporting from the hinterland of Dublin and, equally, a lot of the imports are being consumed in that area, it would seem to make sense to me that the port would be kept where it is rather than having everything transported from somewhere else into Dublin and back out from Dublin to somewhere else before it leaves Ireland.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

In my previous profession, I ran fairly complex manufacturing and logistics operations, so I know that when you are looking at logistics, you are looking at the shortest possible point from A to B and the least amount of handling. That tends to reduce time, reduce costs and reduce carbon. Now, what we have in the infrastructure of the port and surrounding the port, because you cannot help but link the port to the M50 and the port tunnel, those three pieces of infrastructure are absolutely linked to one another and have been a huge success. That is why 73% of everything into and out of the port emanates from within 90 km. It is also why, if you look at how the market has responded to that, there are large distribution and logistics hubs all around the M50, because that is the most efficient way of transporting goods in and out of the port. As for any mention of moving the port, then, you would almost have to cut and paste the infrastructure which supports that, given the volumes we are speaking about. We have addressed, constructively and positively, the need for expanded capacity on the east coast beyond 2040.

We flagged the fact that given how long these things take, if only evidenced by the 3FM project, that needs to happen now and in any way we could we would be supportive of that.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. O'Connell. I am conscious of time. Mr. O'Connell might touch, with some of the others, on passengers because we did not have much reference to them and whether there is scope for doing more. I am aware that Rosslare, Cork and Dublin do a bit. I am not so sure Shannon does too much on the passenger side. It would be interesting to see. With the climate crisis, etc., depending on where one is going, it is probably less carbon damaging to be on a boat than on an aircraft. They might touch on that. I thank our guests for their contributions.

I call Deputy Martin Kenny, who has 11 minutes. I will give the Deputy ten minutes on the clock and one minute to wrap up.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all the witnesses for coming in and for their presentations. I have a couple of a questions.

One of the themes running through it all is development. All of the ports require more development. Outside of Dublin, which has specific issues and has a master plan in place, all the other ports have mentioned how the work of the offshore wind industry will be facilitated, maintained and worked into the future. Certainly what we hear everywhere is that there is huge potential there. I would like to get their view as to the timescale in respect of this. Everybody is saying that this will happen quickly and yet it does not seem to happen quickly. What is the hold-up? Is the infrastructure in the ports one of the key issues preventing the development of offshore wind?

Mr. Glenn Carr:

I might speak first. Phases 1 and 2 are in the Irish and Celtic seas. Mr. Keating and Mr. McGettigan will want to talk about floating offshore wind farms but the initial issue, as we crawl first before we think we can run, is to get phases 1 and 2 completed.

At this point in time, no port in the Republic of Ireland has the facility to match the requirements for what this industry now requires. Arklow would have been the last offshore wind farm - it went through Rosslare Europort - but the components and the scale of the operation now are far beyond anything like that. Over the last 18 months, as I said, we have been working extensively with the developers and the industry to understand the customer requirements.

Rosslare needs to be built and operational by 2027. The key here is 7 GW by 2030. By the way, it will happen anyway, but the loss would be that the activity associated, particularly with the pre-construction, marshalling and installation which is where the real jobs are and which tends to generate economic enterprise around that area, could end up going to another jurisdiction. At this point, it could go to Belfast, but Belfast is filling up quickly. It could go to Liverpool or to a port elsewhere. The industry will have to make a decision on its supply chain in order to give surety to the auction process that it is going through. If you want to maximise the opportunity that offshore wind brings, as part of the transition from fossil fuel to new green energy, to create real jobs, real enterprise and real regional economic development, you have to have your port infrastructure in place in order to attract the industry to set up its base there. What we are proposing is a €200 million facility. It sounds a lot but, as Mr. Keating has said, it is a multi-billion euro industry here. It is not only the facility, by the way, that should be looked at in terms of a port. This is a national strategically important asset that will drive not only the delivery of these projects but, more importantly, economic development and enterprise in those regions that desperately need that as well.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is four years away.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

The industry wants to come here.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. McGettigan wants to contribute on this point as well, if that is okay.

Mr. Eoin McGettigan:

Deputy Martin Kenny asked what the hold-up is. For us, it is identifying who the customers are because it is the customers - the developers - who will pay us for the port facilities. The auction process now has begun to identify that. We are talking directly to the developers and are able to tell them that we have planning permission and offshore licences to build what they need. They are able then to factor in how much they will pay us for those facilities which we can then use to borrow the money to be able to do it. That clarity has only emerged in the last number of months. We are on the critical path. The sooner the ports can build the infrastructure, the quicker the developers can deploy the turbines at sea.

To clarify, we are able to support fixed-bottom wind turbines built, assembled and deployed from Cork and the developers are keen on that. There is Rosslare and us, but we have planning permission. As for that long tail of activity that is needed to get planning, in our case we are good to go once we know which customers are going to pay us, and that is who we are talking to right now.

Mr. Pat Keating:

In terms of the blockages, I am not sure if I agree with Mr. McGettigan. A number of policy issues at the moment are preventing developers from even looking at their projects. The Maritime Area Planning Act 2021, which prescribes the future process to engage the plan-led approach, requires designated maritime area plans, DMAPs, for certain areas to be completed and then for Maritime Area Regulatory Authority, MARA, which is the new marine regulatory agency, to issue maritime area consents, MACs, against those DMAPs. The problem is that the DMAPs are not scheduled to be completed until next year at the earliest. Therefore, if you are an offshore developer, you cannot apply for a consent because there is nothing to evaluate the consent against.

In terms of the system that is being prescribed through the Maritime Area Planning Act, we are not hearing there are any issues with that. There is no issue with that architecture. It is the pace of implementing that architecture, in particular for the west coast or for floating offshore, that is the issue.

I suppose we also need to bear in the back of our minds that we are not competing against regions within Ireland. We are competing against France, Spain, Norway and the UK which are all considerably ahead.

As Mr. McGettigan has pointed out, the developer is key here because he will be our customer but we need the port infrastructure in place first. The developer needs to have the DMAPs so that he can apply for a MAC. The MAC needs to be evaluated against the DMAPs to say that it is in the right area. Once a developer has a MAC in his hand, he can then go and do his site survey, project information and all his ecology studies. He has got a piece of paper to justify a spend. Those studies will take roughly 18 months to two years. Then the developer needs to go for planning permission with An Bord Pleanála. At approximately the same time, you will have the offshore renewable electricity support scheme, ORESS, auctions, which is the developer's future revenue stream. If you would like floating offshore and the certainty that is required, none of those processes for floating offshore or for the west coast are in place yet. When we talk about the pace of roll-out or implementation here, that is what is missing.

Given the scale of investment - you are looking at €1.5 billion per gigawatt - the resource is there. There is absolutely no issue. Every commentator agrees we have the best resources in the Atlantic, certainly Europe-wide if not globally. We have a huge resource. We have got the demand, between local demand or Irish demand which will increase to 27 GW, by the way, according to MARA's figures, when we electrify transport, etc., and the European demand of 450 GW as required by 2050 offshore. The resource is there, the demand is there and the implementation piece is in the middle. While we have a prescribed architecture to implement that, the pace and momentum behind the implementation of the various steps and the sequence, not only in the view of Shannon Foynes Port but also from our consultations and discussions with the industry, are out of sync.

Ireland initially nailed its colours to fixed offshore, which is fine, but fixed offshore is a maximum of 5 GW to 7 GW. Floating offshore is 70 GW plus. The scale of the opportunity maybe goes right back to the Government policy on this. All the various different Departments and agencies, to be fair to them, need to be mandated from the top down to start looking at the huge opportunity that is the Atlantic resource and not say that we will do the fixed first. The big international investment is not really interested in Irish fixed because the big opportunity is in the floating offshore at scale. That is where the big investment will happen. Where we sit today, we are looking at least ten years, all going well, from your first floating offshore wind farm.

Time is of the essence because we are competing internationally. The UK's floating auctions are up and running. We are well behind. We are at least four or five years behind. We have the best resource but in terms of risk management and reducing the risk to allow the industry to invest, we are probably not at the races in an international environment where we need to be.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What change is required to move us from four or five years behind to one or two years behind? What is the prescription required?

Mr. Pat Keating:

The Government needs to call out the big opportunity and that needs to feed down. The mandate needs to be delivered from the Government to the various Departments. The approach at the moment appears to be an analysis of what Irish demand is going to be and what the Irish demand requirements are. If we look at it through that lens, we are missing the big resource because we are saying the big resource is not essential. The opportunity here is bigger than energy. There are socioeconomic opportunities that are probably unprecedented for this country. The scale of this is enormous. That should be the ambition and the objective. It is not about satisfying Irish demand. It is about using this resource in a European context. It is also about the resource itself. If we look at it through that lens, then we can start to say that we need to prioritise everything to make it happen. The DMAPs need to be prioritised. The DMAP process will, at the earliest, be completed by quarter 1 of 2024. MARA is due to be operational in quarter 3 of 2023. It is a resource issue. MARA needs to be fast-tracked. If we want to be looking at the Atlantic Ocean resources, the number and scale of applications that will need to be processed will potentially be significant.

MARA is a kind of filter for An Bord Pleanála. A MAC is required before an approach can be made to An Bord Pleanála. There will be roughly a two-year gap because site investigations and so forth must be completed. An Bord Pleanála must be resourced properly.

There are issues around some of the big international companies, including the likes of Shell and Equinor, that have looked at Ireland. The resource sells itself because what we are selling here is an infinite supply of green energy but there was a level of frustration when such companies engaged with the system. They decided it was not yet the right time.

It is about getting the policy framework correct. It is a matter of fast-tracking the prescribed architecture noted in the Maritime Area Planning Act. I do not think anything needs to be changed. It is a matter of putting the resources into the system.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

We should not underestimate the funding support that will be required. While we are talking about a multibillion euro industry, the reality, from a commercial point of view at the mandated ports, is that the bankable contracts we are talking about are not in place. Those contracts will be for certain durations as each project emerges. If we consider returns on investments over the short term, it should be noted that ports offer a very long-term return on an investment. Mechanisms will have to be found to support the ports and raise the capital in order to build the facilities and ensure they are in place in time.

Michael Lowry (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank our guests for their informative and interesting submissions, which highlight the opportunities while also indicating how far behind we are. I am concerned about our ability to deliver on major projects. We in Ireland have not been successful in doing that and the projects we have spoken about today are major projects.

I have an interest in Foynes Port. I believe there is enormous potential to grow the economies of Limerick, Shannon and the entire mid-west region. After years of struggling, we are now on the cusp of a real opportunity. The opportunity for Foynes is in offshore renewables in the Atlantic and our ability to facilitate that and cope with its requirements.

Mr. Keating mentioned a number of challenges. From what he has been telling us, the challenges involve a variety of agencies. Co-ordination and co-operation between a number of State agencies is very important. The plan and its implementation are extremely complex and require a high level of bureaucratic decision-making that I have no doubt will result in much frustration. I would appreciate it if Mr. Keating would set out what he considers the principal challenges. What is the sequence of the implementation of the phases involved? He mentioned road infrastructure, which is very important. Is the Shannon Foynes Port Company satisfied with the level of buy-in from the Government and agencies for the overall plan? If he would give me some indication of the timescale involved in the various phases of the plan, I would appreciate it.

Mr. Pat Keating:

The Deputy is right in saying a number of Departments and agencies, approximately 11 in all, are involved. Co-ordination is key. The policy Department, if you like, is currently the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, is the relevant Minister. Planning and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage have important roles to play because MARA and An Bord Pleanála currently reside within that Department. As I explained earlier, the policy and consent to planning pieces are in two separate Departments. Within the piece that falls to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, with MARA and An Bord Pleanála, there is potentially a resourcing issue that needs to be addressed and fast-tracked.

The port infrastructure piece resides within the Department of Transport. I can confirm that our Vision 2041 master plan is widely acknowledged and accepted by all Departments. We consulted extensively during the compilation of the plan. The Department of Transport has given us every indication that it is assisting and prioritising its implementation. As the Deputy said, the implementation includes the Limerick-Foynes road scheme, which has been consented to by An Bord Pleanála. It is at the judicial review stage. The planning interactions there are critical. That is a critical piece of infrastructure, not only from the offshore renewable energy, ORE, perspective, but also from the perspective of current business and the potential future expansion of freight capacity. That sits alongside the railway. Both of those projects complement each other and provide synergy. The railway is, thankfully, under construction, led by Irish Rail. It is due to be reinstated for commercial purposes by 2025 and it will connect as far as the jetty head at Foynes Port.

We have called out a new 800 m deep-water quay at Foynes Island, which will be a post-Panamax-enabled quay and will be rail connected. We have commenced the planning process in that regard and we hope to be going to An Bord Pleanála by 2025. We need a MAC for that. We have this project scoped out and have done well over a year's work on the preplanning side. We are now ready to make a MAC application but MARA needs to be operational to issue a MAC. These are some of the roadblocks that are coming home to roost, so to speak. It is essential for us to be able to apply for a MAC for that infrastructure that MARA is up and running in September 2023, as has been stated.

We have engaged an international company named Bechtel to look at the engineering side of our master plan and to examine the funding and financing strategies. As I stated in my opening address in respect of funding, the projects are viable. We have done high-level cost benefit analyses, CBAs. Once we hit the various run rates, our projects are viable. However, given the current nature of the ORE sector, in particular, we will require a change in the funding model and will more than likely require some sort of sovereign debt model, which would require a sovereign guarantee for the initial phases due to the uncertainties of the national sector.

Like any start-up phase, one is going to need some kind of State underwriting or guarantee to support the commercial banks, the European Investment Bank, EIB, the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, ISIF, and all of these agencies. Our current ports policy states that the Exchequer will not be involved in port infrastructure, and that port policy is up for review later on this year.

We are looking at that particular clause in the ports policy, for the funding of future port infrastructure. We are not saying all port infrastructure, but maybe specific port infrastructure. That clause probably needs to be looked at and reviewed, revised or whatever. There is no doubt but that the State has to become more involved - maybe not directly, but indirectly - in the funding model around port infrastructure, particularly for ORE, given that it is a start-up type sector. Once we achieve run rates, this becomes bedded in. The State can then, maybe, step out again, and one can do project finance or something similar.

What we ask is that alongside the key hinterland connectivity requirements which, from Shannon Foynes Port Company's perspective, the State is involved in and supporting - the Limerick-Foynes road and the Limerick-Foynes rail line via Irish Rail - we also need to look at the funding model, and the future funding models in the ports policy. Each port here has its own views on that. Ports are commercial but there is a timing issue here where we need to have the infrastructure available, because the port infrastructure for ORE is an enabling infrastructure, alongside the grid. EirGrid has another key role here. However, that enabling infrastructure has to be available to developers to be able to use, whether it is grid or port. The State has a role to play there, because we are starting from scratch as a country.

Then there is the investment that it supports. For example, €1.5 billion per gigawatt in private sector investment going into offshore renewables is what the levers of this port infrastructure investment provides. We are not looking for direct subsidies but with regard to the timing gap in the funding model, you need upfront certainty for funders in order to be able to place money with ports to do the infrastructure.

Michael Lowry (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Keating. There are so many challenges and moving parts there. How is Mr. Keating actually approaching it? Is he driving it as the executive, together with his colleagues in Shannon Foynes Port Company, or is there an umbrella committee representative of the key agencies to drive this forward? In what way is it being managed at present?

Mr. Pat Keating:

From our perspective, we obviously have our master plan. We have developed that and updated it, in conjunction with the Department of Transport. In some respects, we have gone ahead of the national policy in that we are assuming national policy will catch up. By the time we get to a formal planning application with An Bord Pleanála, it will be early 2025. We can do a lot of the preplanning work now on the assumption that national policy catches up. In parallel, we are engaging, via the Department of Transport, with the other Departments. There is also a new grouping called the Shannon Estuary economic task force out there, which is going to be launched shortly. Again, it has highlighted the offshore renewable opportunity, and that is looking at co-ordinating this approach across the State sector. That co-ordination is absolutely required, and while we are talking about ports, the other big enabling infrastructure here is offshore grid infrastructure. As all the pieces need to fit into place, there has to be a high level of co-ordination.

There is a task force within the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and an interdepartmental task force co-ordinating as well. Underneath that sits the ports co-ordination group as well. From the outset, there is a kind of sequenced approach in which the focus appears to be on the fixed type initially before moving to floating. Our fear with that is that we are going to miss the boat and drop the ball in a competitive international environment, where countries get a step ahead. Given the resources that are required for this, and the fact that the scale of this is absolutely huge, capital resources are scarce and supply chain resources, as we have all seen, are even tighter. First mover advantage is important for this.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Keating and Deputy Lowry.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

I thank the Senator for her question. The relocation of Dublin Port has been much debated for quite a long time. I am relatively new to this role but I think I get the question at least once every second day. In November 2020, the port published an extensive set of papers looking at the question of the location of the port. It looked at it from the point of view of the implications of relocating the port of Dublin to another site on the eastern seaboard and in the absence of that happening, it also looked at what would happen with what we call the development of Dublin Port 1.5. That is where our current position is, that we would develop Dublin Port to its maximum capacity and we would now start planning for that incremental capacity in the years ahead.

The findings of the papers were based on a detailed assessment of the implications economically, and from a time perspective, of relocating the port. Again, I have to draw attention to the fact that it is not just a question of relocating the port. It is also relocating the infrastructure which supports the port, such as the Dublin Port tunnel and the M50, away from the centre of population, namely, Dublin, the largest centre of population in the country, and the impact that would have for our competitiveness. The conclusion of our analysis at least was that a project of that scale would be a mega-project which is likely to take 20 to 30 years plus, assuming that a suitable location could be found on the eastern seaboard. There are very practical considerations when looking at that, at the scale of Dublin Port.

Dublin Port is where it is because of a number of reasons, but initially the port was formed because it is at the mouth of the biggest river on the east coast. That creates deep waters. This was followed by the gradual construction of the Great South Wall and the North Bull Wall, and those waters became as deep as 7.8 m, and even more over the proceeding years. That is critically important, because it enabled larger ships to be able to deposit into the mouth of the river, and consequently the population of Dublin grew out and around that. We still have the deepest ports on the eastern seaboard. Through dredging, we continue to deepen them to a depth of around 10 m, and again that allows larger ships to access from Europe.

As we also have significant oil reserves on both sides, north and south, relocating the port and finding an equivalent area in the eastern seaboard would be a massive infrastructural project. You would have to deepen waters, and put in significant breakwaters to be able to accommodate ro-ro and lo-lo. Then there is the question of Natura 2000 sites, for example. If you look at a map of Ireland and the Natura 2000 sites on the east coast, there is a heavy proliferation all the way down that coast.

The planning around putting a structure as big as Dublin Port in there would come up against significant obstacles and would take a significant amount of time.

That is a short summary of a complex issue but it is why Dublin Port came to the conclusion that the best strategy for the country was to maximise capacity through the existing port. We do not look to extend its footprint any more. Thereafter, we look to develop more capacity on the eastern seaboard. That is the rationale behind that. I will return to the repurposing of lands, which the Senator also mentioned in her question, specifically around housing. I am conscious that we are still out for consultation on the project. Part of that consultation is obviously the Minister's comments as well. We deserve to go back to the Minister and formally respond to those comments as well. We will do that at the end of this month. I will generalise, as opposed to giving a specific answer for the time being. As we look at this challenge, referring to what I said earlier, strategy is about choices. What informs the choices we are making? That is the point. We went back to first principles and looked at the Harbours Act. We looked at various policies. The mandate we assumed from that was to enable international trade through the creation of port capacity. That is the primary purpose. It does not mention other activities, which of course have value, but the mandate is to enable capacity.

That is not to say we do not look at the issue; of course we do. The Minister mentioned three parcels of land in particular. We have offered one of those pieces of land up already to the Land Development Authority, LDA. That went to local council for a vote on rezoning. That was overturned on the basis that the site was not deemed fit for housing rezoning because of its proximity to the port tunnel. There is another piece of land, which is currently acting as refrigerated storage on the east point. The other piece of land in the middle is the car compound, which is closer again to the opening of the port. That car compound will clear 100,000 vehicles this year. Many of those are electric vehicles, which are in support of the national climate action plan to reduce carbon. Relocating those 100,000 cars somewhere else, given the logistics of how this works, is extremely challenging to put it mildly. Recently a vessel came in with 3,000 vehicles. It took three days to off-load the vehicles because there is a convoy of professional drivers, who will travel ten at a time a couple of hundred metres within the confines of the port to the car compound. They do that over the course of three days. The cars are stored there for a couple of days and are then cleared by customs. The car transporters then come in, and the vast majority of vehicles are distributed around the greater Leinster area. Moving that land somewhere else has a massive impact on that particular industry, which again is supporting some of our national climate action plan goals.

That is not to suggest we do not have a critical role to play when it comes to the question of housing. I think we do. We recently looked at some data with some of our engineering consultants. We were interested to find out that if you are building a new three-bedroom house for example, depending on the specification, between 60% and 80% of the value of raw materials going into the construction of that house are imported. As you look at our housing plan for the coming decade and beyond we are going to need to import a significant amount of materials, before we ever get to speak about furnishings, to enable the construction of those properties. I think we have an important role to play in the housing debate. It may not be in a traditional way, but it is an important one.

The Senator's final question was on the timing of planning. At this point, the assumptions we made relating to the master plan, particularly around demand capacity, are as valid now as they were several years ago. That is recent. As I said in my opening statement, we spend time and resources to go outside and get an objective opinion. Given the time it takes to go through the whole sequence, including planning all the way through to construction, it will still be 2035 or 2036 before we finish the 3FM project. At this stage we do not see an interruption in the timing of the plan.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

It is difficult for me to answer that because I do not have the history with the port to do that. However, I will return to my earlier comment and speak as someone with experience in international logistics. Looked at through that lens, the route to market we have as a state, with the port where it is and the port tunnel connected to the M50, is about the best I have seen. It is the most efficient and most effective. It is a significant source of competitive advantage. Once you start playing with elements of that and relocating it your distances get longer. Your double handling gets longer, your costs get higher etc.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to compliment the witnesses on how they run their ports. They are well run strategic infrastructure and absolutely necessary. My questions are to Mr. O'Connell and Dublin Port. His growth assumption is massive. It is a huge growth assumption. It is double that put out in the ports capacity study by Arup. For example, he suggested that 2.25 million roll on-roll off units, where the Dublin capacity study suggested 1.46 million. How was that figure arrived at?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

I will address the Arup report first. As I said previously, the assumptions relating to our demand are critical to determining our capacity.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sure, I get that.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

The Arup report was first commissioned in 2017. Its forecasts were based on assumptions from 2018 to 2023 and beyond. It referenced a number of econometric forecasting consultants in its report, which is contained within the report. It started with the 2018 to 2023 estimates. They were all wrong. I think everybody got it wrong.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Arup report was all wrong.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

No, the estimates on which they based the forecasts were wrong. If you look retrospectively at the 2018 to 2023 estimates put in at that time, and compare those against what actually happened, they were significantly below.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did you factor Covid and so on into that?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Correct. Well, that is what actually happened.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Covid was unprecedented and unexpected, so how would those have been factored in?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Arup did not factor it in. We compared the estimates they made with the actual outcome and they were significantly off. That said, because it was a concern raised by the Minister, we did the following. First, we said it was out of date and things have changed. Second, we had the latest estimates from the Department of Finance so we looked at those. We also looked at OECD figures. Actually, Indecon looked at those. We did not look at them personally and wanted to get an objective view on it. We brought in Indecon and its brief was to give us an objective view on the latest data so we could see if we were right or wrong or what estimates we had to make.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for interrupting, but I am short on time and have a few questions. Mr. O'Connell referenced the Indecon report as being based on long-term historic data.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

There were three elements to what we asked them to do. First, before we got the forecasts we needed to understand what the correlation was between a variety of different economic indicators and the volume of the port. Indecon went back and looked at historic data and said that the strongest correlation, to help us predict demand, was looking at GDP. The GDP growth is strongly correlated with our volume estimates for Dublin Port. That was step one. The second step was to ask Indecon for long-term projections based on the latest available data. That is what it did.

Then we correlated what we knew about growth and the economic indicators with their growth forecasts. This is how we came to the growth estimates. Then we broke them down by ro-ro and lo-lo and then we overlaid our capacity.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is based on a constant growth scenario that dates prior to climate targets, biodiversity challenge targets and the European green deal targets. It is historic and dates prior to these measures being enacted. I suggest the assumptions that have been made are very high. At present the port has 60% imports and 40% exports. Mr. O'Connell suggests we will double what was predicted in 2018. He said the 2018 predictions were wrong.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

If we apply the growth rates we have objectively determined this is how it extrapolates to 2040. I take Deputy Matthews's point. With regard to proving definitively what the economy will do, including all of the factors he has mentioned including the circular economy, we do not know what the impact will be. We are planning 20 years ahead and at some stage we have to take the most informed and objective view we have. This is what we have done.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to move on to the transport aspects. Mr. O'Connell said 73% of road haulage emanates within 90 km of the port. Where does the other 30% come from? Is it from beyond 90 km?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

The 27% is across the rest of the island.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a lot of road freight coming in and out of Dublin Port. Mr. O'Connell has said the ro-ro is under pressure. How many extra HGV movements would Mr. O'Connell expect on an already very constrained M50 as a result of this growth?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

It would stand to reason that if our volumes doubled at that time we would also see a significant increase in HGV movements.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will Mr. O'Connell put a figure on what we could expect in extra HGV movements on the M50 as a result of the growth predictions?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

It would probably be approximately 75% over that period of time.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A 75% increase?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Yes.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On what number?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

At present we have an average of 10,000 HGVs per day.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ten thousand per day?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Correct. That, by the way-----

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

And Mr. O'Connell expects this to increase by 75% per day.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Correct.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a lot of truck movement on a heavily congested M50. How does this align with our objective of trying to reduce emissions from transport?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

I will put this into context. We have also looked at the data on this. If we look at HGV traffic as a percentage of total traffic on the M50 on any given day it is approximately 7%. When we look at the key drivers of congestion it is not necessarily HGVs. By their nature hauliers will not look to run into traffic and congestion. They will look to come early and go late and work around the traffic. This is not to suggest for a moment that we can just sit back and take this lightly. We are looking at digitisation as well when we look to the future to see how we manage traffic and staging. We do this in conjunction with the NTA and TII to see how we manage the increase in traffic that will come as a result of the increased capacity we expect in the port.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To me this suggests we need to look seriously at a rebalancing of the capacity of the regional ports to take some of this, notwithstanding the very strategic importance of Dublin. We need to look at rebalancing to Foynes and Rosslare, which have very good rail freight capacity. I do not see much improvement in rail freight in Dublin Port's strategy. Why is this when we see that rail freight generates 76% fewer emissions per tonne per kilometre than road-based haulage.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

I have a couple of points on this. There has been rail access and rail connectivity to Dublin Port for decades. The infrastructure in Dublin Port and nationally to support rail freight has been far more extensive in the past. It is not a question of access. The question is about demand. In 2022 rail freight accounted for 1% of our total volume in the port. Half of this was driven by Tara Mines. This is a commodity that is particularly well suited to rail freight. This is not a question of access but demand.

If we look at the question of carbon and emissions we must look at the journey from A to B as opposed to one mode of freight versus another directly. What I mean by this is if we compare HGV versus rail over 300 km then rail will win. The difference is when we look at how the detail of the system could work. If cargo is off-loaded onto a jetty and then loaded onto a train which, by the way, potentially creates a massive disruption in a very confined port because everything would stop, then we move-----

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is because we have not included any opportunity to expand rail in the port.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

There has to be demand there to facilitate that movement.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do our climate targets and serious climate objectives not generate this demand?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Sure.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have to look again at how we transport freight around the country. At present we are on approximately 1% of freight. The European target is 18%.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

To respond to Deputy Matthews's point on emissions, if we look at how the model might work it is about relocating the freight point from the port to an inland port somewhere where it is off-loaded. Then it would be stored, which would require infrastructure. Then it would be on-loaded again and 73% of it will come back to the port where it began. When we look at the total emissions of these two processes, the chances are that the second process I have just described has higher emissions than the first.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So rail freight is worse for emissions than road haulage in Mr. O'Connell's view.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

That is not what I am saying. I am saying if we look at the route to market, including rail freight versus what we have today, the chances are it could be higher because there would be extra movements and there would be double or treble handling. It still needs to be put on a HGV to bring it back.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is a big "could be" statement. We need to look more seriously at the opportunity for increased rail freight out of Dublin Port than there is at present.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

We are actively engaged with Irish Rail and we have been tasked by an Arup report, which was previously commissioned by the Department of Transport, to put together a comprehensive business case looking at all of these elements.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am running out of time and I have more questions. I hope there will be a second round to allow for more questioning.

It was suggested that it is all or nothing with regard to the 3FM project. Does Mr. O'Connell see scope to allow for more housing opportunities in the existing footprint and more opportunities for nature? I have looked at the slides in the audiovisual walk-through. There are six slides on the environment and planning and only three on community gain. There is a much greater opportunity in a central location in Dublin which is close to transport and in walking and cycling distance to meet our climate targets, seek more housing and more space for nature and have a higher impact from rail freight. I do not think what is being proposed in 3FM aligns with our climate targets, housing targets, nature targets or transport targets. Dublin Port has signed up to the climate action plan, as have all semi-State bodies.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

I guess the answer to this is that we have a very robust planning process. Before planning for 3FM is ever approved we have to satisfy the requirements of the various policies.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will give everyone another round and if we need a third round we will have it depending on time. It is almost seven years since the Brexit vote happened. A bit like Y2K and other issues, there was - not scaremongering - but concern about what would be needed. Mr. O'Connell has referred to the fact that Brexit space is not as badly needed as thought. Obviously we have all occasionally seen the queues at Dover on the television and how bad it seems to be over there. How has Brexit panned out for the ports? Perhaps it has had benefits for Rosslare Europort in certain ways. How has it panned out for each place?

Mr. Eoin McGettigan:

The Port of Cork had very little trade with the UK. Brexit presented an opportunity because some of the product that was coming into the State via the UK started to come directly into Cork because it is the closest port to continental Europe on the island. It has been an advantage for us. We opened routes to continental Europe that we did not have before. It has not been earth shattering. We have added approximately 10% of our volume directly from the Continent that was not there before.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It has been more of a win than a loss.

Mr. Eoin McGettigan:

Totally. The one thing we are missing is a border control inspection post. Earlier Deputy Matthews mentioned the regional ports in the context of bringing in organic product from outside the EU. We cannot act as a release valve because we do not have the ability to check it. If we had that we would become a credible alternative port at pressure points for the others.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. O'Connell has touched on this. With regard to Brexit, Dublin Port has all of this space that it would like to get back.

Is there any other aspect of Brexit he has seen that is good or bad?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

It is what Mr. McGettigan alluded to, in that the composition of our trade has changed. We are getting far more trade directly from mainland Europe in larger vessels. It is spread out in that way, which has been constructive. When we look back-----

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The land bridge is diminished.

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Yes, but it has settled into a new norm and found its natural resting place. Parts of it have come back over recent months, but not to the same extent they had been.

Mr. Michael Sheary:

In terms of unitised trade, Dublin is the largest port on the island.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

By "unitised", Mr. Sheary means containers.

Mr. Michael Sheary:

Yes, whether that trade is ro-ro, where the containers are driven up or down a ramp, or lo-lo, where they are lifted on and off by crane. Some 80% of what is coming in and out of Dublin is doing so in a box of one sort or another. Ro-ro is the largest element of the business, with significant pre-Brexit flows of trade between Dublin and Holyhead, Liverpool and elsewhere in Great Britain.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Much of which continued on to continental Europe.

Mr. Michael Sheary:

Using the land bridge. The immediate impact of Brexit on Dublin Port was threefold. First, there was some diversion of ro-ro trade to Rosslare and ports in Northern Ireland. Second, there was a more significant change in the flows within Dublin from British routes to EU ones, particularly Rotterdam and Zeebrugge. Third, there was a movement from ro-ro to lo-lo. As the market found its new equilibrium over the course of 2022 and got used to the new practices, regimes and so forth, much of the trade that had been lost in 2021, particularly to Northern Irish ports, returned to Dublin. Without boring the committee with too many statistics, total volumes of trade on the island of Ireland last year were flat from a unitised perspective whereas Dublin grew by 4%. Within that ro-ro trade, we have seen a 64% increase in the volume of containers coming via direct EU routes. That is predominantly driver-unaccompanied traffic, which by its nature creates the additional pressures to which Mr. O'Connell alluded on the land space available.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In terms of the climate, it is probably better than having trucks taking containers abroad individually. They are now going via ship without the drivers being picked up on the other end.

Mr. Michael Sheary:

Yes. The reason that much of the growth has been possible on the EU routes is that the shipping lines are using larger vessels with a greater interchange. For example, the CLdN service is coming in with a 600-unit on, 600-unit off interchange. The service is getting the economies of scale to drive that as a viable option.

That said, the land bridge route is still there and an important aspect of the business and the logistics chain, notwithstanding the growth in EU trade. Of 1 million ro-ro units last year, between 600,000 and 700,000 went to Great Britain, many of them using the land bridge.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did Brexit have much of an impact on Foynes?

Mr. Pat Keating:

Not particularly from a trade perspective. From a European policy perspective, though, it did because Europeans shone a light on Ireland in terms of the TEN-T regulation. Where once we had just one core corridor, now we have two. Ireland is unique in that sense. The Shannon Foynes Port Company was extended onto the two core corridors, elevating us to the highest level in the EU's port policy hierarchy, which was important.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was a positive result from Brexit.

Mr. Pat Keating:

Yes. In terms of planning, having policy support is important, as is funding. There is what is called the Connecting Europe Facility, CEF, budget, which sits under the TEN-T regulation. Our elevation provides potential access to that funding for port infrastructure. From a policy point of view, Brexit was positive.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Rosslare has quite a lot of new routes and so on.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

Yes. I will provide some interesting statistics. Believe it or not, but for the first time ever, 52% of the traffic that pre Brexit would have gone to the UK or used the UK land bridge to reach Europe came to Rosslare. This is interesting in terms of regional development and the willingness of the supply chain to adapt and move. It demonstrates that transferable cargo from Dublin to Rosslare was achieved while also giving the industry what it wanted. I am not disagreeing with my colleagues, but it is important to point out that Rosslare is less than two hours away from Dublin whereas it would take someone three hours to go by ship past Rosslare to Dublin. Brexit brought a significant shift in the supply chain into Europe. Equally, it brought a significant shift whereby more than 80,000 units moved out of Dublin down to Rosslare, which was good.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Was that mostly ro-ro trade?

Mr. Glenn Carr:

Yes. We only have ro-ro.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They are all driving from Dublin to Rosslare.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

No. Again-----

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am only asking.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

We are undertaking a great deal of consultation on our rail freight strategy directly with industry. Not to dispute the figures cited earlier, but there is a large amount of activity outside of Dublin. Most of our exporters are in agricultural or food, which is not a business in the Dublin area. Trade is moving that way. We have seen a large shift in trade in the likes of fish, fresh produce and just-in-time products, which are essential for Irish and European markets.

The downside of Brexit has been trade with the UK. We have seen a significant drop in that respect. Although it will not return to any real extent, we are seeing a small rebound. The positive news on the UK front has to do with passenger traffic. Currently, we are at nearly 90% of pre-Covid levels of tourist and other passenger traffic. We went from six to 36 ferries and we are now serving Bilbao, Cherbourg, Le Havre, Dunkirk and Zeebrugge. Bar Zeebrugge, each of those will offer passenger services this summer. This is essential for our connection with our EU neighbours and the UK. It brings in money and activity.

The UK freight routes will remain challenging. We are two years in and it is evident that there has been a significant shift in supply, not just into the UK, but directly with Europe, with supply chains having shifted across various industries.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Crowe has joined us, after which Deputies Kenny and Matthews can contribute again if they wish.

Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise. Usually, I am present for the full meeting, but 100 things are being juggled this afternoon.

I have read some of the opening statements and have a few short questions, the first of which will be for Mr. O'Connell of Dublin Port. I wish to ask him about the port's berthage and its scope for welcoming more cruise ships and large inward tourism. My next question will largely be framed around a story I saw on Sky News yesterday. Some residential barges are now moored at the Port of Hull to cater for refugees. Is there a tourism development plan beyond what we have already seen and is there a role that Dublin Port, as the capital city's port, could play in providing berthage for ships to live aboard to accommodate the large influx of refugees?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

I thank the Deputy for his questions. I met representatives of the cruise industry a couple of weeks ago and they asked the same question. We provide berthage for approximately 35 to 40 cruise ships per annum. In fact, we had one in yesterday and the day before. They tend to be small to medium in size because the reality is we cannot accommodate the large ships, and there are no plans to do so. We do not have the capacity to offer them berthage, given the depth of water, the quays they would require and the demand on those from our large lo-lo ships from Europe. I believe large cruisers are mooring off Dún Laoghaire, with passengers being shunted across to the mainland.

Regarding barges, we are in contact with the Department, which is considering a similar scheme. Barges could potentially be accommodated further down on Sir John Rogerson's Quay.

We have some jurisdiction down there and are working to see if we can make that happen. I do not know the detail behind it other than that the Department has examined it and we are co-operating with it.

Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On large ships, and I know Dún Laoghaire has a role to play in this as well, does Mr. O'Connell feel the capital is missing out by not having capacity? Is there a future plan to go further out from East Wall or any of the farther out locations of the port to examine if there is capacity to build something new?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

At the moment there is not. It is not part of our plans. We are also conscious of reports from across Europe showing that the impact of large cruise ships is not necessarily always positive for the capital. We have no plan at the moment in the master plan to do that.

Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to address this question to Mr. O'Connell and then address Mr. Keating. Any time their counterparts who manage airports come before the committee, they always tell us about their environmental credentials. We often hear about how aviation is moving to sustainable aviation fuel, SAF. There is a similar trend but it is not progressing as well in the maritime industry. It is examining different mixes of fuels. Much of that is down to shipping companies, not to ports. I wish to ask, as the country's main port, does Dublin Port have plans to move with the times? Airport managers tell us they have designated part of their airport for sustainable fuels and they are doing this, that and the other. Has Dublin Port built in something or is there a plan over the next years for a sustainable element such that if a ship pulls up and wants to avail of whatever new fuel form is being used, the port is equipped for it? Is the port planning and strategising for the next decade or so in terms of that level of sustainability?

Mr. Barry O'Connell:

Yes, is the short answer. All of our infrastructure is future-proofed, specifically around shore to ship power. I am not so sure about the fuels that are used, but in ship to -shore power, we are accommodating that and any infrastructure development in place.

Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is good to hear. I wish to pose a few questions to Mr. Keating from Shannon Foynes Port Authority. There is the possibility of a lot of anchored wind turbines on the east coast but it will be floating wind energy off Loop Head and Moneypoint, for example. The port authority, of course, has skin in the game and it will, I hope, be lucrative for the company and all working and on the tail of that. Does Mr. Keating have concerns about how the floating offshore wind is to be phased? It may not happen quite as quickly as the east coast projects.

Mr. Pat Keating:

We kind of dealt with some of that.

Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Apologies.

Mr. Pat Keating:

The short answer is “Yes”. I am not criticising anybody here but there is a need for the Government at the highest levels to call out what Ireland's ambition is in this area. It is to satisfy just local demand or do we want to engage our resource in its entirety and satisfy European demand? It is a critically important question to answer. If the answer is the latter, we want to use our resources to assist Europe and increase the value added from that resource nationally, the focus on floating offshore wind and the west coast needs to be elevated considerably. The mandates that cascade down to the various Departments may ensure the focus and priority on floating offshore become more immediate. Currently, there is phase 1, phase 2 and the new phase 3, about which there is some uncertainty. Then, there is the enduring regime, which is from 2030 and beyond. The problem with all of that is that, as ports, we must provide the enabling infrastructure, which port infrastructure is, in advance. The enabling infrastructure is ports plus the grid. The likes of EirGrid has a huge role as well. Certainty is needed when going for planning, consenting and funding - the bankers will need certainty as well.

Everything is being pushed out to a degree at the moment. It is about 5 GW by 2030, the east coast, then moving to the south and the west coast is from 2030 and beyond. It translates, as I said earlier, into the designated marine area plans, DMAPs, which are currently under consultation. That is the first job of work which must be completed under the new Maritime Area Planning, MAP, Act. They will not be completed for another nine to ten months, I think. The maritime area consents, MACs, come after that, which must be issued by the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority, MARA. Those timelines are critically important. Without the DMAPs in place, developers cannot start investigating projects because they cannot get licences to do site investigation work, for example.

It goes back to the start and, as a country, what we want from our offshore renewable resources. As I said earlier, there is an immense resource out there. It is about the timing of when we engage. Even if we engage immediately and start to push and fast-track, it will be 2032 before the first turbines will be commissioned, allowing for planning lead times and all of that. Even by acting right now, 2032 is the earliest point. Other countries have their auctions up and running already so they are five years ahead. The process is DMAPs, MACs, planning permission and auctions. That is the rough timeline for a developer. The ports must be in place for developers to be able to price their projects for auctions and all of that.

Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I might get to ask Mr. Keating one more question in my remaining time. I hope to come in again in a while, so I will have questions for other witnesses. I am more au fait, as spokesperson on aviation, with things that take to the sky. Our airport managers have a European-wide network which they feed into and discuss policy with, etc. Is there something similar for ports? Some months ago, a very senior diplomat from another EU country was here. He said, in private session, that if Irish ports are not configured and ready to take offshore wind to bring turbines on-site, anchor them, construct them and all the initial stuff, the ports of Hamburg, Bremen and Rotterdam already have orders in place for other countries. They can fulfil those orders and could wipe the eye of Ireland. Essentially, this diplomat said there are all of the environmental reasons we should do that, and there are a hundred of them. We will not list them off because I think everyone accepts that we need to do this. The next thing is this is lucrative for Ireland. We have such a wind vane coming in from the wild Atlantic, this will be majorly lucrative. The third thing, which I think the witnesses understand better than the public, is that the first phase of construction, development and getting everything on site is also lucrative. Why allow that opportunity to pass Ireland Inc. by and allow another nation or another port like Bremen or Hamburg come over and fulfil it? Is there a network of European ports? Will the witnesses give an indication, comparable to Shannon Foynes, Cork or Dublin, of where other European ports are in being able to fulfil this initial stage of wind development?

Mr. Pat Keating:

There is a network of European ports, which is known as the European Sea Ports Organisation, ESPO. Renewable energy is high on the list there. Regarding Ireland, it is driven by national policy, though. The rubber hits the road when we try to get our planning MAC consents, planning permissions and funding strategies. We called out the issues in our master plan, which was launched last November. They all need to be addressed. As ports, we can only do so much and, in fairness, a lot of work is being done collectively by the ports. The roadblocks are still there regarding consenting. The framework is established - MARA and An Bord Pleanála - but the resourcing of those is important, as is timing of the mandates for them to start investigating. This phasing - phase 1, phase 2, phase 3, enduring regime - must be fast-tracked. Enduring regime should be front and centre and needs to be fast-tracked from the perspective of Shannon Foynes and the Atlantic.

Mr. Pat Keating:

If you look at where the auctions are and where Ireland is versus other countries, they have much more certainty. Take the ScotWind auction that was held; 17 GW of floating offshore and £750 million raised in just option fees. That provides the ports in Scotland with certainty. We need to be able to determine a run rate or a build-out throughput for our port activity. Option auction fulfils that as well, and so does granting MACs, as we can then see there is a definitive demand for our port infrastructure. Until those elements are in place, it is a bit of a guessing game for the ports. We can push on so far with our planning applications.

However, the time will come when we need to get this infrastructure funded and that certainty needs to be in place, and I keep going back to the MAP Act, that the mechanisms that are prescribed are actually implementable.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Following on from that, it was mentioned that Scotland had a big auction for floating wind. The particular advantage we have in Ireland is that the west and south coasts have huge potential due to high wind speeds. They also have very rough seas. Has the technology reached the stage to enable putting floating offshore in the types of waters we have? We have been hearing up until recently that we are not there yet. In other jurisdictions, are the floating turbines there to the scale we are talking about in Ireland? How are they working?

Mr. Pat Keating:

Yes, the technology is there. The broad consensus among the industry is that the technology is there. We refer to production at scale. The industrialisation and the build-out at scale needs to happen. Based on the experience of fixed offshore, once we get into that production cycle and facility with efficiencies of scale and all of that, the costs of floating offshore will come down. This is evidenced by the fact that, at those floating offshore auctions in France, UK and California, there have been real bids. People have put their money on the table to build floating offshore. The Scottish auction had 17 GW of floating offshore. Of 65 applicants, only 15 were successful in the auction round. That gives an indication of the level of interest. The sector, and the private sector, is committed to this. They are satisfied that the technology is there, but absolutely the costs need to come down from where they are today. However, the consensus is that once we start producing at scale, we will get the efficiencies of scale to bring the costs down, or the levelised cost of electricity, LCOE, which is the cost of producing electricity. We can take comfort from the scale of the interest in those offshore auctions that have happened in other jurisdictions.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Keating. Coming back to the use of rail for the carriage of freight, my understanding is from speaking to somebody recently who told me he had expertise in these matters, but who can know, that one of the issues was that a great deal of the containers that come into Ireland are widely distributed. Containers come in off a ship, and if we were to put them on a train, it would not be like other jurisdictions where there are three or four big cities in a country. We have one big city in the country. If we were to send the containers by rail, at least half or three-quarters of that freight would end up going on a truck and travelling as much as if it had been sent on trucks in the first place. That goes back to the earlier point. Having said that, is there the opportunity to use freight or look at contexts where there are larger volumes of similar product going to a particular destination? The issue was mentioned about Tara Mines with all the zinc ore, which is a large volume of a single product. Is that the reason we do not have as much rail freight in Ireland? What is the reason?

Mr. Glenn Carr:

We have set out our rail freight strategy. One of the key parts of the infrastructure needed is inland intermodal hubs. This is where, as the Deputy said, a great deal of product might be taken out of Dublin Port but 80% of that is for a certain location. They key is to build a facility, such as that built around the M50, which is unfortunately just road connected, and we replicate that, as we see all over Europe where product is consolidated. That is where the rail does the heavy moving. It takes it from the port to the inland intermodal hub from which shorter distances are then provided by the HGVs. That is the model. We do not have that structure in Ireland. Our plan is to develop at least three of those intermodal hubs.

We have been talking to some of the biggest freight forwarders in Europe who say this makes sense. We have been talking to large industries, such as the dairy industry, which have, for the first time ever, come together with us and shared their data. They are all in competition but, equally, they recognise the fact that the real issue facing them is how to move product sustainably. For example, one of the key performance targets of a major employer in the west of Ireland, which is currently at the bottom of the league in Europe, is its sustainable supply chain. It moves nothing by rail. That will affect decisions made outside of Ireland, in Europe and America, about future development at that site. That is a real concern for that company. We are working with it. Its ambition is to move two trains a day out of that site either to Dublin or to Waterford Port. We have to make sure we have the connections at the seaports. That is essential. Then we have to build strategically located intermodal hubs that can take 60% or 70% or more of consolidated products. We are not talking about rail going after every single truck.

By the way, the truck and haulage industry has an incredible role to play here as well. Think of the inefficiencies of somebody travelling 120 km as against travelling 20 km. That truck can get in ten or 20 shunts or whatever. Again, in terms of technology or electrification of trucks, that is a long way off. I am involved in the road transport industry also in another business we have. I believe that the best we will see in the short term is what Diageo has recently done. It has an electric truck that takes the kegs down the quays from the site beside Heuston Station to Dublin Port. I do not think we are going to see electric trucks doing 90 km or 100 km.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The electric trains will do that.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

We cannot get away from the fact that the train is 75% more fuel efficient. Even if trucks go to hydrogen, the train will still be far more efficient in that regard. However, we have to put the infrastructure in at the ports. We know the rail infrastructure is there, so we are looking at a sizeable site, for instance around Limerick Junction. It is already there. The land is there and it is rail connected. We are in discussions even with the likes of people in the IDA who are trying to identify future land banks for manufacturing sites. A key part of any company that will be looking to come to Ireland now is how it will move its supply chain. A simple fact is they want rail as an option. We must provide the rail-based options for these companies.

The supply chain will adapt. Certainly, we take great comfort from talking to major industries throughout the country that are telling us they want to shift from road to rail. There will still be a road element in that, but when we are talking about substantial employers in this country, and when we talk about the corporation tax, these are very important employers, they want to see a rail-based solution in this country. It makes sense. It can be efficient.

I totally disagree that rail has to be done over substantial long journeys. There are many examples across Europe and elsewhere where shorter base rail journeys are across many industries. It is no longer just for heavy bulk product. We are the only country in which the retailer Zara is present where it cannot move its product by rail. It is a clothes company which, as part of its sustainable offering, it is not just about the manufacturing of its clothing but also about how it moves that clothing. We really need to ensure we drive the rail strategy that will see us move from 1% to 17%. It is easy to say rail only takes 1%. Of course it does. Look at the offering we give today. No wonder it is only 1%. We have to rethink and look for the next five, ten and 15 years at what industry is demanding and certainly what society will demand in terms of cities that will be emission-free going forward. That can only be achieved with rail.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Kenny did not get in at all yet. He is listening intently. I am conscious that many of the freight terminals were closed in the past ten years. In fact, nearly all of them were closed. Are there plans to reopen them?

Mr. Barry Kenny:

To be fair to Mr. Carr, as the director of commercial business units, he covers both the rail freight and Rosslare Europort aspect. That is what the rail freight 2040 strategy is about, going back into our ports and developing the intermodal hubs. Sadly, in the past, businesses closed. Decisions were made regarding the sugar beet industry which was a huge volume for rail freight services. That and other industries closed that were fairly large players in terms of rail freight. The plans we have also need to be supported by public policy.

We are working with the Department of Transport to make it a better policy environment for businesses to choose to move to rail freight. Something in other countries, and it is the model that we think is preferable, it is not about subsidising but rail freight operating on a commercial basis. It is very straightforward. It is about the type of environmental incentives needed for business to make it more attractive to move product by rail as well because, as Mr. Carr outlined, they have impetuses to make that happen which the State can capitalise on. We are very much engaged with the Department on that.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To expand on what Mr. Carr said, there is a future for those hubs and for smaller freight delivery probably by electrified haulage with smaller trucks and shorter journeys. We have battery-powered electric trains on the way that can do an 80 km round trip and battery-run smaller haulage can be certainly done as well.

I wish to clarify something with Mr. O’Connell. I had a look at the European Environmental Agency, EEA, report on the comparison between HGVs and rail in CO2 per km. HGVs emit about 137g whereas rail comes out at 24g, despite what he said about the change and chopping and moving the freight, I do not see that it would be 5.7 times higher in any scenario at all. I wanted to clarify that. The EEA report is available.

On policy issues relating to offshore energy, we have a fantastic opportunity here in Ireland. We have the best wind speeds in Europe. We have to be careful that the negative talk does not talk us out of that investment as well. Industry, as industry always does, will say things are not quick enough and that they are not happy. It will always demand that because it has money to be made out of it and it has investors to keep happy. However, let us consider where we have gone in the past three years: three years ago, before the Government came into office, there was a target of 3 GW for offshore and it is now 7 GW. We have more than doubled the target. In that time we have passed legislation where the Maritime Jurisdiction Act 2021 has set the line around our country and we have seven times the sea area that our landmass is and the national marine planning framework, the overarching planning strategic policy document that shows how we are going to do everything in the marine sector. The Maritime Area Planning Act was the biggest request of the wind sector, the ORE sector and others in the maritime space which wanted us to develop a fit-for-purpose maritime planning Act. The Foreshore Act is nearly 100 years old. I was 1933, I think. It is not fit for purpose and a nightmare for anybody, from local authorities, ports or anyone who wants to do anything; they did not want to go near the Foreshore Act at all. Now we have it set out. We have the offshore renewable development plan, phases 2 and 3. It is plan-led, as it should be. Industry always wants to see that. It wants to see a strategic pathway set out, notwithstanding the points that were made here about the designated maritime area plans, DMAPs, and it will take a bit of time because we did not act fast enough on offshore. Twenty years ago we put turbines off the coast of Arklow and then we stopped and we focused inshore and we focused on gas and oil. Things have changed considerably in terms of climate and we know we have the best offering out there. It is better than anybody, including the Danes or the Austrians, and we are going to do it and it is happening at the moment. I take the point that people are concerned it did not happen or it might not be happening fast enough.

On floating versus fixed-bottom, the Western Economic Association International, WEAI, last year said it was concentrating on what is deliverable in fixed-bottom. There is wind floating technology off Scotland. I cannot remember the name of the one that was mentioned earlier. I wonder about transferring that to south west Ireland where there are much higher wind speeds and how deliverable it is, but it will happen. We have set a target of 30 GW for that and it could be 70 GW. I am happy that we have put a lot of things in place. We should do more on it but we need to be careful not to talk us out to talk us out of this space because it is global investment. The last thing it needs is for Ireland to be negative about it. With operators it is fine because they want more but we have to do what is best for Ireland and best for our people.

On the Marino Point development in Cork, it used to be the old IFI route from Shelton down to Cork. What freight options is the port would be considering there? What can Marino Point offer?

Mr. Eoin McGettigan:

The Deputy is correct in identifying that is the old IFI location and it is rail connected. At the moment we bring in a couple of ships a week that bring in chemicals, which are mixed on that plant and then leave by ship. Therein lies the problem. There is a winding little road over a 400-year old bridge. For us to properly use that site to take capacity out of the city centre, the road will need to be improved. Our plan is that once that road is improved and, therefore, we can get the planning permission to use both rail freight – I have met with Mr. Carr and Jim Meade, his ultimate boss down there to see how that might happen – and road to take bulk cargo out of Cork city centre. It is a key part of our footprint for the future.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the emissions of rail versus HGV, we must also take air pollutants into account. A lot of people die from air pollutants and particulate matter, etc.

On rail freight for Rosslare, my vision is that we have Ballina connected to Athenry to Limerick Junction across the Waterford line, reopen the Barrow Bridge and connect into Rosslare. That western Atlantic-southern corridor is the perfect counterbalance to Dublin. I do not know if there is a correct term for it, but is there scope for a type of rail-off load-on facility? Is that something that could be explored in Rosslare? Rosslare freight has increased by approximately 30% with a 400% increase to Europe. It is a real success story there. Is there something we can do on that. Obviously, the western rail corridor forms part of that but at least from Athenry across to Waterford or Rosslare.

Mr. Glenn Carr:

Rosslare is rail connected but we also need to be developed outside of the port. We await the Waterford-Wexford line because that is the route we would go. Particularly when considering that Waterford Port, which is already rail-connected, Cork will be rail-connected, Shannon Foynes is being rail-connected and so on, we get that arc we are discussing, which has us connected into all the sea ports and is absolutely ideal.

From our perspective, with the offshore wind facility we are building, there are two issues we need to look at. First, the offshore wind hub will deepen Rosslare Europort. One of the restrictions now for some ships that may want to come to Rosslare is the fact that the depth is not there. The ORE project allows us to deepen to port to -11 m in the channel and a minimum of pockets of 9 m at our berth. That will also mean that we will be able to take ships that currently pass Rosslare into the port. However, land side, we have to have the space. The initial plan is that we would build two berths as well as for the ORE hub that will be easily transferable once the ORE heavy construction ends that would be easily transferable to lift-on lift-off, roll-on roll-off or ConRo. The land area that will be developed is in excess of 26 ha and we recently purchased an additional 18 acres of land beside that, taking into consideration that in the 2030s, when the heavy construction leaves us and moves around – and some of that will be with Cork as well as ourselves because our site will probably only produce approximately 2.2 GW of turbines – what we will have on the south east is a ready-made facility for lift-on lift-off and roll-on roll-off. At that point, our ambition is that we will bring the rail into that facility quayside and at that time we hope that the Waterford-Wexford line will be ready to go. Then Rosslare will be connected in there. It is absolutely in our plan but we need to be careful. We cannot be something to everybody and or initial focus for the site is for the ORE because Rosslare Europort has to be ready for 2027, and the first phases, for the farms planned. When the ORE goes, will we be left with a white elephant of a site? Absolutely not. Let us think of the pressures that are going to be on the south east coast and Dublin and when it is considered that we have deepened the port with two additional berths, we can take a lot of traffic in there that might not be able to be serviced in the most efficient way elsewhere. We will do a big part of that by rail, and having that connection both to Dublin and equally along the western lines, and up to Athenry, will see that line completed.

Steven Matthews (Wicklow, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On policy, there is a narrative that the auction price cap was set at €150 per MWh. It should be noted that is a cap. Wind Energy Ireland has suggested that should be between €95 and €115. Many of the auctions in Europe have come in at too low a price because of uncertainty have failed. We need to be sensible about it.

We are setting that correct strategy and what Mr. Carr is talking about in Rosslare fits exactly with that.

Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy.

I thank all the witnesses for all the work they are doing on behalf of all of us in getting goods onto and off the island and getting raw material on to get exports back off, generating much-needed employment but also lots of revenue to spend on lots of other things. I wish them all well in their ambitious targets. Offshore wind is certainly a hugely interesting development for all of us. Equally, everything they are doing on a daily basis is valued by us all. We probably do not acknowledge enough the work they are doing but it is appreciated.

I thank all the witnesses from the various different organisations who were here from Dublin, Cork, Rosslare and Shannon Foynes. They put a lot of work into their opening statements and answered all the questions well. I thank them for that.